• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.42 no.1
• /
• pp.71-83
• /
• 2011

An ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) approach becomes more important as an alternative management method for a sustainable development of fisheries domestically and internationally. Many methods of applying a practical EBFM to fisheries management have been investigated, and considerable attention has been given to developing effective indicators of the present status of and changes in ecosystems and putting them to practical use. Among ecosystem indicators, developing socioeconomic indicators for EBFM is particularly important. This is because socioeconomic factors have direct effects on ecosystems, and ecosystems have direct effects on socioeconomic factors. Therefore, it is imperative that socioeconomic indicators are developed and evaluated in order to predict changes in ecosystems and to provide advice for effective fisheries management. This study is aimed to develop socioeconomic indicators which can be combined with biological and ecological indicators, in order to conduct the ecosystem-based fisheries assessment. In terms of socioeconomic indicators, five socioeconomic criteria were considered as important attributes of socioeconomic changes. These criteria include economical production, business conditions, income, market, and employment indicators. For evaluation of newly developed socioeconomic indicators, the Traffic Light System (TLS) method was used. In addition, on the basis of the application of developed indicators to the Korean large purse seine fishery, the socioeconomic conditions of the fishery and the usefulness of the indicators were evaluated and management implications were discussed.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Fisheries and Ocean Technology
• /
• v.46 no.1
• /
• pp.32-49
• /
• 2010

Ecosystem-based fisheries management requires a holistic assessment of the status of fisheries by integrating fishery ecosystem indicators for management objectives. In this study four objectives were identified such as the maintenance of the sustainability, biodiversity and habitat quality and socio-economic benefits. The ecosystem-based fisheries assessment (EBFA) model to assess fisheries and their resources at the ecosystem level developed for Korean fisheries (Zhang et al., 2009) has a number of indicators for three management objectives. However, it was found that there were some overlapping components among indicators and that there were difficulties in assessing some indicators in the EBFA model. This study identified problems of the approach and suggested more pragmatic and simpler indicators. It also presented alternative reference points to assess indicators and discussed issues associated with the application of the EBFA model to a marine ranching ecosystem. In this study a total of 24 indicators were used for the assessment which included 4 socio-economic indicators. New indicators and reference points were demonstrated by applying it to the Uljin marine ranch.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Environmental Restoration Technology
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.59-71
• /
• 2009

The goals of this study were to development Natural Ecosystem Value Assessment Model, to suggest the practical applicability of the Natural Ecosystem value assessment for development areas, and to assess natural ecosystem quantitatively using GIS. The Model can evaluate Natural Ecosystem Value between before and after land developments. To select indicators for the model, we conducted the literature reviews. and six indicators and the standard of evaluation had been developed through the expert interviews and literature reviews. the relative importance of the evaluation index throught two times expert questionnaires was found out. the Natural Ecosystem Value Assessment Model has been established, The results demonstrate that although the suggested six indicators are arranged by priority, to maintain quantitative and qualitative the natural ecosystem value, all indicators are desirable to be maintained complementarily. The findings of this study suggest that the natural ecosystem value assessment model appears to be effective an assessment for damaged natural environment value and possible to assign a score value. Also, this model can be applied to research areas and has implications to help maintain the natural ecosystem in land development districts.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.47 no.3
• /
• pp.53-69
• /
• 2016

The purpose of this study is to explore the ecosystem service and benefit indicators of natural seaweed beds. Ecosystems of natural seaweed beds provide a wide range of services and benefits to human society including provisioning services, regulating services, supporting services, and cultural services. Indicators for each of the ecosystem services are chosen by marine plants ecologists and as follows. Ecosystem indicators of natural seaweed beds for provisioning services are well-being food(amount of seaweed harvested/amount of fish landed, fish biomass, area of natural seaweed beds, the number of species, contribution to the second production), raw materials(amount of biomass by breed, amount of aquaculture feed), genetic resources(amount of genetic material extracted, amount of genetic material contained by age and habitat), and medicinal resources(amount of medicinal material extracted). Ecosystem indicators of natural seaweed beds for regulating services are air purification(amount of fine dust/NOx or $SO_2$ captured), climate regulation(amount of $CO_2$ sequestered), waste treatment(amount of N, P stored, biochemical degradation capacity COD), and costal erosion prevention(length and change of natural coast line, amount of sediment prevented). Ecosystem indicators of natural seaweed beds for supporting services are lifecycle and maintenance(primary production, contribution to the second production) and gene pool protection(amount of compositional factors in ecosystem, introduced species). Ecosystem indicators of natural seaweed beds for cultural services are recreation and tourism(the number of visits of an area) and information for cognitive development(amount of time spent in education, research and individual learning about ecosystem of natural seaweed beds).

• Journal of Soil and Groundwater Environment
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.15-24
• /
• 2015

The soil ecosystem is a complex system performing particularly complicated and varied functions, such as providing a habitat for organisms, acting as a medium for plant cultivation and growth, and functioning as a buffer against external materials in the environment. To assess whether these important functions of the soil ecosystem are executed appropriately, the concept of soil ecosystem health has been introduced, which is defined as the ability to perform the specific functions of the soil ecosystem. Understanding soil properties and soil indicators related to soil functions is essential to assess the soil health. In this study, systems, the indicators, and evaluation factors for assessing soil ecosystem health employed in a number of countries were investigated and discussed. In particular, it is necessary to introduce a technique for the evaluation of soil ecosystem health in Korea and to develop techniques and indicators appropriate to the soil ecosystem and status in Korea.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Environmental Restoration Technology
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.119-132
• /
• 2018

This study was conducted to suggest an assessment indices to evaluate the ecosystem services of the unique functions of wetlands as well as economic value provided by the village wetlands. The assessment indicators applied in this study were used by the RAM indices. The results of RAM assessment on the village wetlands in Cheonan city were analyzed by item and critical functions of the village wetland. They were derived by assessment indicators of ecosystem services, and the village wetland ecosystem were presented by Focus Group Interview (FGI). The 20 critical indices were selected from 52 different indices by analyzing the wetland function assessment items. 13 indicators excluding duplicate indexes by function, were selected as ecological service impact indicators. Finally, ecosystem services were evaluated by using AHP analysis to calculate the weight of each assessment indices and apply it to the 9 village wetlands. The results of this study confirmed that the functions of the village wetlands are compliant with the ecosystem services. Based on this assessment of the unique functions of wetlands, it will serve as a methodology for assessing ecosystem services. The study was also conducted on 49 wetlands in Cheonan. The detailed assessment of wetland ecosystem services based on the wetland ecosystem function proposed by this study, was further developed as a follow-up study. It suggested that the wetland areas should be compared and be used as a general standard. In addition to the assessment of the economic value of ecosystem services provided by the village wetlands, it would be useful to assess the unique features and convert them into value.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Fisheries and Ocean Technology
• /
• v.49 no.4
• /
• pp.459-468
• /
• 2013

In the application of the ecosystem-based fisheries assessment Jeonnam marine ranching ecosystem, two fisheries, funnel fishery and trap fishery, were selected as target fisheries. Black seabream, Acanthopagru schlegelii, rock bream, Sebastes inermis, gray mullet, Mugil cephalus, were selected as target species for the funnel fishery, and conger eel, Conger myriaster, was target species for the trap fishery. For assessing indicators of four management objectives, that is the maintenance of sustainability, biodiversity, habitat quality and socio-economic benefits, indicators were selected considering the availability of data, which were 5 indicators for sustainability, 3 indicators for biodiversity, 4 indicators for habitat, 2 indicators for socio-economic benefit. The Objective risk indices for sustainability and biodiversity of two fisheries were estimated at yellow zone, medium risk level. The objective risk indices for habitat and socio-economic benefit were estimated at green zone, safe level. The species risk indices (SRI) were estimated at yellow zone. The fishery risk indices (FRIs) were estimated at 1.143 and 1.400 for funnel net fishery and trap fishery, respectively. Finally the ecosystem risk index estimated at 1.184.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Environmental Restoration Technology
• /
• v.24 no.6
• /
• pp.67-87
• /
• 2021

Provisioning service, which is one of the ecosystem service functions, means goods and services such as food and fuel that people get from ecosystem. Provisioning functions are closely related to the primary industry, a sector of economy. Excessive demand and use of human society can cause trade-offs among regulation, cultural, and supporting services. Therefore, it is important to perform evaluation ecosystem services periodically and to monitor the time series fluctuations to identify the impact of provisioning services on other ecosystem services (trade-off) and to maintain sustainable provisioning service. When it comes to the precise assessment of provisioning service, it is necessary to get the statistical data and standardize indicators and methods. In this study, indicators and methods, which are applicable to the spatial level of national-local-protected areas, were derived through literature analysis and expert survey. The result of this study implies that provisioning services measurement by spatial level improve the efficiency of the establishment of environmental conservation plans by whose purpose.

• Ocean and Polar Research
• /
• v.29 no.4
• /
• pp.319-326
• /
• 2007

Coastal marine ecosystems continue to suffer unrelenting pressures from human population growth, increased development, and climate change. Moreover, these systems' capacity for self-repair is declining with such increases in anthropogenic production of various pollutants. What is the present health status or condition of the coastal ecosystem? If our coastal areas are unhealthy, which conditions are considered serious? To answer such questions, the United States, Canada, and Australia are currently assessing coastal ecosystem health using systematic monitoring programs as well as identifying and implementing management plans to improve the health of degraded coastal ecosystems. To evaluate marine environments, Korea is currently using a limited number of factors to estimate water quality. In fact, we are ill-prepared for assessing coastal ecosystem health because no biologically specific criteria are in place to measure the responses to various pollutants. We should select ecosystem-specific indicators from physicochemical stressors and evaluate the subsequent biological responses within each ecosystem. Furthermore, a set of practical indicators should be generated by considering the characteristics and uses of a local coastal area and the key issues at hand. The values of indicators should be presented as indices that allow understanding by the general public as well as by practitioners, policy makers, environmental managers and other stakeholders.

• Korean Journal of Ecology and Environment
• /
• v.56 no.4
• /
• pp.393-405
• /
• 2023

This study was conducted to select indicators for assessing national biodiversity. For this purpose, 140 biodiversity-related indicators were identified as a result of inventorying biodiversity-related indicators used in Korea and abroad, and when these indicators were applied to the pressure, status, and response indicator system, it was found that status indicators accounted for the largest number of indicators, with 29 pressure, 59 status, and 44 response. We also categorized the status indicators into genes, species, habitat, function, and quality, and found that species and habitat indicators accounted for the majority. Pressure indicators were categorized into direct exploitation, pollution, alien species, climate change, and habitat change. As a result, it was found that direct exploitation and pollution accounted for most of the pressure indicators. In addition, this study used internationally used indicator selection criteria to establish criteria for selecting domestic biodiversity assessment indicators. Using this list of indicators and indicator selection criteria, we evaluated the prioritization of domestically applicable biodiversity indicators through relevant expert consultations. 1) Vegetation class, 2) Land cover indicators, and 3) Change of protected area ranked highly. In fact, these indicators have been used in many studies due to the availability of assessable data. However, most of the highly scored indicators are based on ecosystem area, and further consideration of ecosystem functions and components(species) is needed.